Is it an indictment on the Colts that......

[peytonmanning18]

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

[Derakynn]

Pretty sure literally everyone on this forum has said that Manning hardly ever had a defense while he was here. Nothing new. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

Not really because we lost to the Patriots twice when they were really Great otherwise we would've been the team of 2000's. Broncos have beat the Pats twice but they aren't near as good now as they were in 2003 and 2004. Their Defense was much better back then. That 2004 team they had is arguably a Top 5 team ever. One of the seasons the Broncos beat the Pats to get to the SB Gronk was even out = 2013.

[AKB]

Peyton hasn't even broken 2,500 yards this season. To me, it is clear that the Denver Bronco's success this year has mainly come from their talented defensive front and back end. The point you are making here doesn't really have any merit considering the Broncos could be in the same position with Osweiler starting the entire season. 

 

 

[WoolMagnet]

Hmmmm.

i never thought about that..........

what was the question again?

[ReMeDy]

1 hour ago, Derakynn said:

Pretty sure literally everyone on this forum has said that Manning hardly ever had a defense while he was here. Nothing new. 

 

Not only that, for a long time, we didn't have a good special teams either. I remember for the season we reached the Superbowl, our special teams was so bad I'd hold my breath on every return. Sure enough, Devin Hester returns the opening kickoff for a TD in the Superbowl (the only time ever in Superbowl history). People who didn't know the Colts were surprised. I wasn't. Typical Colts.

 

When I read there would be special adjustments to special teams, such as no more wedge blocking and a shorter field, I was ecstatic. Roger Goodell saved us.

[coltsva]

I would say it's more kudos to Elway. But it is interesting that having a top 5 of all time QB yielded only two trips to the big game.  

[Patagonia Chris]

Peyton hasn't been very good this year and he has an all time great defense. His defense in Indy often consisted of two pass rushers, eight guys who could walk and a safety who took a paid vacation every year until January. In Denver, the team was already built and the QB was the missing piece. In Indy, the team was built around the QB at the expense of the defense.

[achcolts]

it just further proves sbs arent a one man show. in fact, peyton was far from one of the strengths of the team

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 hours ago, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

Actually it's a indictment on himself.

He had some pretty good teams here in Indy and didn't step up his game in playoffs. The offense failed in the post season as much if not more than the defense did.

 

[southwest1]

I'm surprised I'm even commenting in this thread right now because until the SB has been played & INDY's not playing in it I usually avoid Colts topics until the league year is officially concluded. However, I like PM18 as a forum member so what the hades SW1 will chime in. 

 

No, I don't blame Peyton for only playing in 2 SBs as a Colt because similar to what CBE was referring to both Troy Brown & TY Law from the NE Patriots singlehandedly took additional SB appearances away from INDY. 

 

Yes, Brown & Law were that bleeping good as much as it pains me to admit that fact it's the truth. 

[southwest1]

2 hours ago, ReMeDy said:

 

Not only that, for a long time, we didn't have a good special teams either. I remember for the season we reached the Superbowl, our special teams was so bad I'd hold my breath on every return. Sure enough, Devin Hester returns the opening kickoff for a TD in the Superbowl (the only time ever in Superbowl history). People who didn't know the Colts were surprised. I wasn't. Typical Colts.

 

When I read there would be special adjustments to special teams, such as no more wedge blocking and a shorter field, I was ecstatic. Roger Goodell saved us.

Bingo RDMY! Our special teams minus Adam V. & Pat McAfee have always been a H-U-G-E liability for us as long as I can remember. 

 

Don't get me started on Hester man. That return destroyed my theory that nothing exciting ever happens in the 1st QTR of a SB. My theory was prior to that is that it takes about 15-25 minutes for your SB nerves to settle down. Then, wham 6 points...I was like what the hades just happened? The flash bulbs went off & now we're down 6? Son of a...I can laugh about it now, but at the time, I was stunned & ticked off.  

 

I just didn't expect us to give up a TD that darn quick. I know; I know strange stuff always transpires in SBs, but I was scratching my head on that 1. The 1st play really? Sigh...

[southwest1]

3 hours ago, Pagano's Realtor said:

Peyton hasn't been very good this year and he has an all time great defense. His defense in Indy often consisted of two pass rushers, eight guys who could walk and a safety who took a paid vacation every year until January. In Denver, the team was already built and the QB was the missing piece. In Indy, the team was built around the QB at the expense of the defense.

I will admit that Bill Polian loved to throw offensive pieces around Manning like Harrison, Wayne, Clark, Tamme, Collie, & Garcon. However, Freeney, Mathis, Brackett, June, Glenn, Sanders, & Bethea were also  crucial pieces to INDY's Championship lineup in 2006 as well. 

 

If you wanna make the argument that Polian held onto Sanders too long with his health issues after we got our ring, I'll buy that. However, it's not like Polian never contributed to our defense, line, & secondary over the years. 

 

If you wanna make the case that Bill replenished the offense better than the defense after 2006, yeah I can't argue that point either. It's hard to really know how much room Jimmy gave Bill financially to retool the team though say by 2009. 

 

The biggest indictment against Bill indirectly in our 2nd SB appearance is this: In 2009, Manning had to win a boat load of games in the 4th QTR because our defense struggled stopping teams that year leading up to the big dance. 

 

That's what I remember most about 2009: Peyton have to throw 1 last touchdown in  a ton of games that season because our D couldn't close games out. 

[Chucklez]

4 hours ago, Pagano's Realtor said:

Peyton hasn't been very good this year and he has an all time great defense. His defense in Indy often consisted of two pass rushers, eight guys who could walk and a safety who took a paid vacation every year until January. In Denver, the team was already built and the QB was the missing piece. In Indy, the team was built around the QB at the expense of the defense.

Hey that's not fair...  Bob would play in the season opener and then take his paid vacation.... 

[SteelDragon]

Probably in the minority here. 

If your question is: did Denver put an all-around better team around Peyton? The answer is yes.

The Denver offense 2 years ago was possibly the best ever in NFL history. Granted, it's not THAT good this year,  but it's still capable.   The defense this year is the best in the league. Objectively,  we have to admit for the last four years,  John Elway has run a better organization than did Bill Polian with the Colts by a slim margin. 

[UKColt13]

Superior coaching staff and GM. A no. 1 in the league defense. It's what happens when you build on both sides of the ball instead of just one, ala Polian.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

I always felt like the 2006 SuperBowl was Indy's to lose and of course they got beat by Pittsburgh on the road to it. I also always felt that Indy should have beaten Nawlins in the 2010 Superbowl...if those two had played out questions like this would probably cease to exist???? It is a shame and we can't go back...so I choose to just appreciate what was accomplished by these teams. 

[Nadine]

only if that's what you want to believe

[pgt_rob]

It only means that the Broncos have a much better roster, especially on defense than the Colts ever really had with Peyton.

[ColtRider]

22 minutes ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

I always felt like the 2006 SuperBowl was Indy's to lose and of course they got beat by Pittsburgh on the road to it. I also always felt that Indy should have beaten Nawlins in the 2010 Superbowl...if those two had played out questions like this would probably cease to exist???? It is a shame and we can't go back...so I choose to just appreciate what was accomplished by these teams. 

 

Exactly, RR7. I choose it as well. Losses matter! It is the drive to overcome & not lose which pours out wins. Milestones (whether losing or winning ones) create a better practice no matter what's involved. Losing invites practice. Practice & practice makes eventual perfection. It's just the way things roll. 

[shakedownstreet]

i just farted 

[shakedownstreet]

42 minutes ago, Nadine said:

only if that's what you want to believe

 

sorta like believing in ghosts

[SilentHill]

11 hours ago, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

 

Apples to Oranges, Denver has a great defense.

[Tsarquise]

No, but if the Broncos win, I bet you'll hear media and other fans spout this narrative every where, when talking about the Colts and Manning's legacy. I have already started to hear it.

 

Go Panthers! 

[jskinnz]

12 hours ago, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

 

Personally I don't care what it says about the Colts and Manning's time with them.  It means nothing.  

 

Having said that, I don't think it means anything.  There is obviously this belief that Indy should have won more than 1 Super Bowl while Manning was the QB but the front office did not do enough to help.  I think that is a big bunch of nonsense.

 

1) If Baskett hangs onto the onside kick against the Saints, does Polian then become a genius?  Or does that make the Manning legacy greater? 

 

2) The Colts rise coincided with the Pats' run as well.  In 2003 & 2004, they were just a better team than Indy.  I don't believe there is a great travesty that the Colts' were beaten by a dynasty.

 

3) Several of those playoff loses were at least in some part due to Manning playing really poorly.

[bababooey]

Some teams are better at building "win now" teams than others. Broncos got Emmanuel Sanders for a steal, Jets got Brandon Marshall for a steal, Colts paid a ton for Andre Johnson.

[Tsarquise]

2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Personally I don't care what it says about the Colts and Manning's time with them.  It means nothing.  

 

Having said that, I don't think it means anything.  There is obviously this belief that Indy should have won more than 1 Super Bowl while Manning was the QB but the front office did not do enough to help.  I think that is a big bunch of nonsense.

1) If Baskett hangs onto the onside kick against the Saints, does Polian then become a genius?  Or does that make Manning legacy greater? 

 

2) The Colts rise coincided with the Pats' run as well.  In 2003 & 2004, they were just a better team than Indy.  I don't believe there is a great travesty that the Colts' were beaten by a dynasty.

 

3) Several of those playoff loses were at least in some part due to Manning playing really poorly.

I agree. The AFC was stronger back then. And, it wasn't the the teams fault when Manning scored 3 points in the divisional game in 2004 and threw a bunch of pics in the 2003 AFCCG. Or what about that horrible loss to the 8-8 Chargers. The 2007 Chargers loss wasn't really Manning's fault, though.

 

As far as the thought that the Broncos surrounded Manning with a better team is false. The Broncos team wasn't that great until this year, and the fact that Manning is in the Super Bowl in his worst year ever, shows that Super Bowls as a QB stat is silly.

 

And let's not forget that the Broncos have not even won a Super Bowl with Manning yet and they wont be winning on Sunday.

 

 

[Flash]

The issue, to me, isn't between between Manning/Colts vs Manning/Broncos. In roughly the same time span, Elway built a much better team than Grigson has. The Broncos had the best offense (all-time great) a few years back and now they have arguably the best defense in the league. Fantastic job by Elway.

 

It's no secret -- surround your talented QB with a great defense and you will win championships, ala Broncos, Panthers, Seahawks, Patriots, Ravens, 49'ers, Packers, etc... Great QBs will make the offense work.

 

Give Luck a great defense and he'll make it to the Superbowl.

 

[ztboiler]

Getting to two Super Bowls and winning one is absolutely a fair indictment of the way those teams were built and the schemes we chose to run.

 

I don't know why people can't both enjoy the success that we had at a historic level, while also recognizing that there were deficiencies that kept them from succeeding at higher level.

[jskinnz]

6 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

Getting to two Super Bowls and winning one is absolutely a fair indictment of the way those teams were built and the schemes we chose to run.

 

I don't know why people can't both enjoy the success that we had at a historic level, while also recognizing that there were deficiencies that kept them from succeeding at higher level.

 

Personally I have always felt that getting to the Super Bowl is a tremendous accomplishment on its own and don't view a loss in the big game as an indication of a failed season.  I think the Bills' accomplishment in the early 90's was remarkable.

 

I go back to my post earlier in this thread.  If just a few things go different in the Saints game, does Manning or the Colts' legacy get radically altered?  Personally I don't think so.  

 

And while I do think you can make a reasonable case that the Colts should have / could have been built differently, they were still good enough to win in some cases but luck or their own self-inflicted wounds prevented it.

[ztboiler]

14 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Personally I have always felt that getting to the Super Bowl is a tremendous accomplishment on its own and don't view a loss in the big game as an indication of a failed season.  I think the Bills' accomplishment in the early 90's was remarkable.

 

I go back to my post earlier in this thread.  If just a few things go different in the Saints game, does Manning or the Colts' legacy get radically altered?  Personally I don't think so.  

 

And while I do think you can make a reasonable case that the Colts should have / could have been built differently, they were still good enough to win in some cases but luck or their own self-inflicted wounds prevented it.

To my liking, your perspective has great and appropriate balance.  My perspective (and your's may too) includes that Manning's Colts didn't get lucky enough because they didn't give themselves enough chances (because of the way they were built).  

 

Consider that the Pats went to 6 and won 4 and were in the AFC Champ game as losers 4 other times in the same era.  Their luck was much worse than any the Colts ever had in losing 2 Superbowls, but they gave themselves so many chances that they have a lot more to show for it.  It certainly isn't because they had a better QB - they had a better system and better personnel.

[General_Hux]

How soon we get that Peyton went to two Super Bowls in four years as a member of the Colts as well...

[Narcosys]

18 hours ago, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

[Jim H.]

This post is an indictment...

[RockThatBlue]

19 hours ago, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

Gee, ya don't say?

[OLD FAN MAN]

23 hours ago, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

 

23 hours ago, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

 

4 hours ago, RockThatBlue said:

Gee, ya don't say?

 

4 hours ago, RockThatBlue said:

Gee, ya don't say?

 

23 hours ago, peytonmanning18 said:

Peyton is in his 2nd Super Bowl in 4 years with Denver while in 13 years with Indianapolis he only made it to 2?  

wade phillips defense put him there this time, why didn't we try to get wade after he left the Texans?

[Tsarquise]

Yeah, it was definitely the D this time.

[peytonmanning18]

12 hours ago, SilentHill said:

 

Apples to Oranges, Denver has a great defense.

That's kinda the point 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

On 2/4/2016 at 5:37 AM, UKColt13 said:

Superior coaching staff and GM. A no. 1 in the league defense. It's what happens when you build on both sides of the ball instead of just one, ala Polian.

Yeah, but that's a done deal after this year, as Elway's plan was win now, and not really focused on the long-term. Pretty much their entire defense is up for free-agency, and they'll only be able to keep a few of them. If they lose this game tomorrow, they're not gonna see the Super Bowl again for a long time.

[chad72]

On 2/4/2016 at 9:36 PM, Derakynn said:

Pretty sure literally everyone on this forum has said that Manning hardly ever had a defense while he was here. Nothing new. 

 

Not to mention the horrendous special teams that hurt us in field position constantly. Even the D had a few good years but the special teams were consistently terrible, enough said :). When you go back and look at the 2006 AFCCG and SB that we won, you see the field position the special teams gave up with Ellis Hobbs of the Patriots, and one kick to Devin Hester was enough for the Colts to smarten up in the big game. We could have won our SB with less headaches if not for bad special teams that year. Thank goodness 2 phases of our team showed up consistently.

 

Not to mention that year in 2006 - TDs by Justin Miller of Jets, Antwan Randle El of the Redskins, and so many other instances where we gave up big returns that I could quote off the top of my head. Even that big return in the 2010 Jets playoff game that set up the winning FG for the Jets, the last game Peyton played as a Colt, put the exclamation point on the putrid not-so-special teams in the Peyton era. I never understood why it was such a neglected step child of the Polians. We overpaid players like Brackett, Hayden etc. and didn't choose to sign quality players for special teams, Grigson has the upper hand on the Polians by a little bit on the headstart, IMO.

 

At the highest playoff level, special teams mattered for field position in close games. Missed FGs by kickers and big returns on punts and kickoffs, and nothing innovative tried to pressure opposing punters accounted for bad field position or points missed out in so many playoff games.